[navarre]

(Original post by Tycho)

The SNP have a clear mandate to hold a referendum now. The time it has taken to get to this point has been long and depressing, so why not wait another couple of years to properly iron out all the issues? It's the unionists who are proclaiming all of this to be a very difficult thing to do, and yet they want to rush into the decision-making? It's the same nonsensical approach which - time and again - leads to poorly considered schemes that tend to leave some form of misery in their wake. No, the SNP are a party which cares about its people. They are considerate, maticulous, honest and successful. These are the facts.

Of course. The thoughtful and considerate SNP aren't holding a referendum now because we all know they'd lose- of course not, how naive to think that! They're really staying in the oppressive union they claim is bad for Scotland for another two years because they actually love their people!

If the SNP so loves its people, how comes they'd lose if they put it to referendum now? And how can they love them when they're choosing to stay in the Union, which they claim to be oh so bad to Scotland, for another two years? Surely it'd be best to get out of the Union ASAP? Oh, all in the name for the 'people' of course. Let's not forget that. Those same people who don't get a choice for another two years whilst they continue to suffer.

[Cyanohydrin]

(Original post by Tycho)
No, the SNP are a party which cares about its people. They are considerate, maticulous, honest and successful. These are the facts.

This is the scary thing with nationalists. Blind and idiotic devotion.

Nothing is clear cut. Unionists and Nationalists please take note!

I typed this up on another post

Spoiler:

Show

I think you will find that quite a few free market Tories support the idea of Scottish independence. They certainly dont view independence as some sort of red menace. Strange that only the far left in Scotland see Scottish independence as a step towards socialism and a blow against imperialism. You think someone like Murdoch would perceive the danger but no he supports Scottish independence as do Souter etc. The fact that new labour and the Tories oppose Scottish independence does not mean that independence is step forward for the working class. They both support more devolution but oppose Scottish independence for their own political reasons connected with the political self interest of their parties. The British ruling class dont support Scottish independence. However it is clear they will not use force to oppose it since Capital could live with an independent free market Scotland. Indeed sections of the capitalist intellegencia have pointed out the advantages of Scottish independence in driving down tax rates on business and increasing competition ( read increasing exploitation of the working class) see articles in the economist and FT. The rise of Scottish nationalism has the advantage of combating and side-lining socialist conciousness which used to be quite a big factor in Scotland and also in weakening solidarity between workers in Scotland and England. The fact that new labour and the tories and the liberals oppose each other at election times does not mean that they are not all neo liberal.

I'm not sure if you are actually aware of the mainstay of the SNP's electoral base but if we see independence all those people from the north east, Perthshire etc who used to vote Tory (and who’ve been the mainstay of the SNP vote since the 70s) will emerge into the light - remember the conservatives at one point got over 50% of the vote in Scotland, 25% of voters even went for Thatcher in 1992 (where do you reckon this has gone? The SNP and the Lib Dems is where). Jim Mather SNP MSP and cabinet member even said that Any notion that an independent Scotland would be a left wing country is delusional nonsense. The SNP is a middle class formulation which is largely a mouth-piece for the Scottish middle class (and some others like Mel Gibson who think they’re Scottish). The SNP’s recent conversion to social democracy is in my view a temporary tactic to win over the Scottish wc. Populism in a word. A few years ago my local council voted to abolish sheltered housing wardens. A Labour and Lib Dem coalition in effect and opposed by the SNP and the Tories. In the neighbouring council the sheltered housing wardens were also removed. Voted for by the SNP/Tory coalition and opposed by New Labour and the Lib Dems. Tweedledees and Tweedledums. They are all ****e and anti-working class – careerists all managing cuts. *******s to the "left wing" (lol) SNP and their non-independence in the neoliberal institution of the EU (which is forcing much more devastating cuts, as well as destroying democracy in Greece and Ireland at the moment)!

There are people in Scotland (and elsewhere) who think that independence in and of its self is a positive good. Connery and Brian Souter are two people who come to mind. They are vicious conservatives who haven’t got a socialist bone in their bodies. Salmond may not be quite as bad but I don’t think we should delude ourselves that he and the SNP want a socialist Scotland anytime soon - and you and the SNP should stop misleading the Scottish public on this issue. The News Corp stuff is just simply more evidence of the fact that he is an unprincipled populist. Souter particularly is a disgusting man, and is the leading contributor of money to the SNP - Souter is a man who funded one of the most hurtful and bigoted campaigns in recent times. The Keep The Clause Campaign - an utterly shameful period in Scotland’s history. Leaving his homphobia aside, Only two parties in Scotland are opposed to some form of re-regulation of the bus industry: the Tories and the SNP. The SNP’s position is rather harder to understand. After all, they pride themselves on being a 'left as centre' as you proudly claim right? Hmmm, could it be that the SNP's largest donor of funds is Brian Souter, the owner of Stagecoach buses. Hmmm! I think it might! Salmond even promised regulation of buses, wonder why he has dropped it! He is a fat corporatist git.

I actually hate the SNP more than the Tories, they are a bunch of pied pipers manipulating Scotland's both left wing tradition and our historical heritage so they can enact their vision of a free market and capitalist Scotland within the EU (controlled by high finance and unelected capitalists in Frankfurt). Using the Euro. At least we know where we stand with the Tories.

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...0#post37557300

If I were to support independence it would never have anything to do with the bloody SNP and fat Salmond.

[Tycho]

(Original post by TCD23)
Wrong again there mate. First of all you do not put more in, say what you like it's utter crap, I also see you fail to post any actual reports further confirming your speaking out of your arse.

And being anti-military, quite easy mate thanks. Severely reduce the size of our standing army, airforce and navy but keep the nukes. Simples

Would my London? Considering that only half of my family is from London and the other half is a mixture of Scottish and folks from Newcastle I have no idea what your talking about.

Oh and one more thing, Alex Salmond is rotten to the core as well. That must be why his party are doing cash for favors -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...nor-links.html

And cosying up to ol' Rupey Murdoch

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...rupert-murdoch

Oh and we want to keep you because our countries people actually tend to like each other. To be frank here mate, you obviously hate the English, so what you need to do is stop reading all of Alex Salmond's little speeches and think for yourself.

One more issue, the EU, so much for independence right? Alex wants to give up the Scottish Pound and any economic control over his own country to go rub up with the EU. How would you be any more independent again?

Your writing style is pretty annoying to read to be honest. I'm sitting here pondering why I am actually trying to make sense of what you're trying to say. You've clearly misunderstood some of my phrases, and have therefore taken their literal meaning and used it out of context. Never mind.


Anyway.

You're suggesting keeping nuclear weapons but cutting back our - already - pretty small armed forces. Not only are our armed forces small, they are fragmented across the globe and poorly equiped. So how are you going to cut that back, and even if you did, what exactly would be the point in keeping nuclear weapons? If a country were to invade us, you're not going to fend them off with nuclear warheads. There are no winners in a nuclear war, ever.

I'm not going to comment on what you have dug up from the depths of a toilet. SNP MSPs have a far better reputation for being honourable to the people they serve than their London counterparts. Why do you think the Scottish parliament has a completely transparent expenses system. When London MPs were claiming expenses for cleaning their motes and duck houses, SNP MSPs were hard at work making Scotland a better place for the people of Scotland. Name one SNP MSP (or MP) who has faced legal action over abusing their position?

Thought not.

I absolutely don't hate the English. I have many English friends and relatives, and I love them. What I hate is people coming to my country - particularly people like Cameron - and telling me and my people that we are too stupid, too small, and too inferior to self-govern. Yes, that pisses me off a bit.

[Cyanohydrin]

(Original post by TCD23)
Your deficit is lower because you have less people mate.

A deficit as a percent of Scottish GDP

Also I would like to point out that London accounts for twenty percent of the GDP of the UK despite having a slightly larger population than Scotland. Do the math, it's London not Scotland subsidizing everyone.

Yes indeed. London is indeed an over subsidised region - in fact it is the MOST subsidised region! London centrictiy is one of the main problems with the UK (and has it's most negative effect on the English regions like the North East).

[Scoobiedoobiedo]

I say we give them independence.

Then invade them and take their oil.

[the mezzil]

If Scotland leaves all it will do is leave one weak, cold, hilly nation, and another cold, less hilly, weakened group of nations.

United we are strong. Seperated we are weak.

[Tycho]

(Original post by navarre)
Of course. The thoughtful and considerate SNP aren't holding a referendum now because we all know they'd lose- of course not, how naive to think that! They're really staying in the oppressive union they claim is bad for Scotland for another two years because they actually love their people!

If the SNP so loves its people, how comes they'd lose if they put it to referendum now? And how can they love them when they're choosing to stay in the Union, which they claim to be oh so bad to Scotland, for another two years? Surely it'd be best to get out of the Union ASAP? Oh, all in the name for the 'people' of course. Let's not forget that. Those same people who don't get a choice for another two years whilst they continue to suffer.

Why rush? What are the benefits to having the referendum tomorrow? There are none. Obviously people are going to vote to remain in the union (mostly) if the referendum was held tomorrow. The people have been lied to for years by pro-union media outlets and people naturally fear change. The people need to be informed of the facts before they go to the polls to cast their vote. This is going to be the most important vote in Scotland's history (or at lease for a very long time), it's not something that one should rush into without careful consideration.

Your approach is idiotic at best, and completely manipulative at worst. Please refer back to my courtcase analogy. In your method the jury would be out before even hearing any evidence. What chance is there - in that scenario - of a fair conviction?

Absolutely zero. You fear what the nationalists have to say because you know it'll be a strong case. Deal with it.

[TCD23]

(Original post by Tycho)
Your writing style is pretty annoying to read to be honest. I'm sitting here pondering why I am actually trying to make sense of what you're trying to say. You've clearly misunderstood some of my phrases, and have therefore taken their literal meaning and used it out of context. Never mind.


Anyway.

You're suggesting keeping nuclear weapons but cutting back our - already - pretty small armed forces. Not only are our armed forces small, they are fragmented across the globe and poorly equiped. So how are you going to cut that back, and even if you did, what exactly would be the point in keeping nuclear weapons? If a country were to invade us, you're not going to fend them off with nuclear warheads. There are no winners in a nuclear war, ever.

I'm not going to comment on what you have dug up from the depths of a toilet. SNP MSPs have a far better reputation for being honourable to the people they serve than their London counterparts. Why do you think the Scottish parliament has a completely transparent expenses system. When London MPs were claiming expenses for cleaning their motes and duck houses, SNP MSPs were hard at work making Scotland a better place for the people of Scotland. Name one SNP MSP (or MP) who has faced legal action over abusing their position?

Thought not.

I absolutely don't hate the English. I have many English friends and relatives, and I love them. What I hate is people coming to my country - particularly people like Cameron - and telling me and my people that we are too stupid, too small, and too inferior to self-govern. Yes, that pisses me off a bit.

To be honest I feel a bit sorry for you now, you have obviously been brainwashed. Alex Salmond is in with Rupert Murdoch, a transport Tycoon who wants to go back to Victorian England and wants to give up your currency and culture to join the EU.

Look, we both hate David Cameron all right, we all hate politician but please don't think yours are any different. The problem is with politicians in general not the union. I support UKIP who also don't have any expenses.


BTW a bit of proof of douchey SNP:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politi...enses.17366304

http://www.scotsman.com/news/snp-mp-...enses-1-468906

http://the3towns-archive.blogspot.co...-expenses.html

What do you have to say to that?

[TCD23]

(Original post by Cyanohydrin)
A deficit as a percent of Scottish GDP



Yes indeed. London is indeed an over subsidised region - in fact it is the MOST subsidised region! London centrictiy is one of the main problems with the UK (and has it's most negative effect on the English regions like the North East).

So what's the solution, London and Scotland go independent or something?

[Tommo3]

If it's just the one question on independence, then the status quo will be maintained.

If it's two questions then devo max. The only way I can see Scotland going independent in the upcoming referendum is if the government completely **** up, I don't mean the way they are at the moment, but completely and utterly **** it up. Plus it'll help if they get their favourable question, 'Do you agree that Scotland should become an independent country?'. Which is compared to the unionist question 'Should Scotland leave the United Kingdom and become Independent?'.

[Cyanohydrin]

(Original post by TCD23)
So what's the solution, London and Scotland go independent or something?

No not at all. Not every part of a country is going to be as prosperous as another.

I call London a parasite it is not simply because more is spent there per head than anywhere else in the country, it is because London-centric laws have been passed for 30+ years sucking vitality from the rest of the UK. Always however comparison of how rich London is compared to the rest of the UK is the first response. London should be paved with gold given the policies of the last 30 years yet it still only does a bit better than Scotland per head. The London centric British government is the reason why London does well, whilst places like Stoke or Liverpool fester.

London is a parasite that sucks the blood out of all other parts of the UK. Remove Scotland (oil rich etc) from the equation and the English regions will suffer more. It might make them fight back though (which they need to do, regardless of the outcome in 2014). Also, regards your London GDP business, the fact that basically all of our countries businesses head offices are registered in London skews the figures enormously. Also, the population in London have more spent on them per head than any other region.

I don't see what the problem is with a fully federal UK, then each country can decide how it wants to set up its legislature. The upper chamber at Westminster could then be converted to a "senate" elected through PR across the UK and its dependents (they might even have to contribute for a change) which would decide policy on communal issues eg defence. I don't doubt this would be initially expensive and the details would have to worked through but I think it would create a much more stable system than we currently endure.

[Mr Dangermouse]

I think it's unlikely that we will vote for independence. In the end I can see it being rejected by around 35-65.

[Patriot Rich]

I honestly can't imagine Scotland leaving the Union, the Scottish people won't be willing to take such a risk when there's no guarantee that an independent Scotland will be any better off.

Then again no one thought the Southern United States would secede at the beginning of 1860 and we all know what happened a year later, so I'm definitely not ruling out either way.

[Mr Dangermouse]

(Original post by Scoobiedoobiedo)
I say we give them independence.

Then invade them and take their oil.

That's a poor attitude to have. A lot of English people seem to think we want independence. We don't.

[Tycho]

(Original post by TCD23)
BTW a bit of proof of douchey SNP:

Anyone who refers to something they have read in a newspaper as "proof" is more than just a bit silly. These things are settled in court, not in a newspaper. I think you've proven my point: the SNP have a far better reputation in this area than any other major political party. Note: I don't consider UKIP to be a major party. The only thing major about UKIP is that they have majorly stupid policies on the constitutional future of the UK, and therefore Scotland.

[TCD23]

(Original post by Cyanohydrin)
No not at all. Not every part of a country is going to be as prosperous as another.

I call London a parasite it is not simply because more is spent there per head than anywhere else in the country, it is because London-centric laws have been passed for 30+ years sucking vitality from the rest of the UK. Always however comparison of how rich London is compared to the rest of the UK is the first response. London should be paved with gold given the policies of the last 30 years yet it still only does a bit better than Scotland per head. The London centric British government is the reason why London does well, whilst places like Stoke or Liverpool fester.

London is a parasite that sucks the blood out of all other parts of the UK. Remove Scotland (oil rich etc) from the equation and the English regions will suffer more. It might make them fight back though (which they need to do, regardless of the outcome in 2014). Also, regards your London GDP business, the fact that basically all of our countries businesses head offices are registered in London skews the figures enormously. Also, the population in London have more spent on them per head than any other region.

I don't see what the problem is with a fully federal UK, then each country can decide how it wants to set up its legislature. The upper chamber at Westminster could then be converted to a "senate" elected through PR across the UK and its dependents (they might even have to contribute for a change) which would decide policy on communal issues eg defence. I don't doubt this would be initially expensive and the details would have to worked through but I think it would create a much more stable system than we currently endure.

I actually support Max Devo as well, I just don't that is what would occur. A feudal system like you have suggested would be much better for all involved.

[TCD23]

(Original post by Tycho)
Anyone who refers to something they have read in a newspaper as "proof" is more than just a bit silly. These things are settled in court, not in a newspaper. I think you've proven my point: the SNP have a far better reputation in this area than any other major political party. Note: I don't consider UKIP to be a major party. The only thing major about UKIP is that they have majorly stupid policies on the constitutional future of the UK, and therefore Scotland.

You are a brainwashed moron. I honestly feel abit sorry for you and I'm sure the majority of Scottish people feel shame at your bigoted views.

[Band]

(Original post by Azog 150)
I was born in Scotland, lived there for four years and will be eligible for Scottish citizenship

Didn't realise the citizenship requirements for an independent Scotland had been set yet.

[navarre]

(Original post by Tycho)
Why rush? What are the benefits to having the referendum tomorrow? There are none. Obviously people are going to vote to remain in the union (mostly) if the referendum was held tomorrow. The people have been lied to for years by pro-union media outlets and people naturally fear change. The people need to be informed of the facts before they go to the polls to cast their vote. This is going to be the most important vote in Scotland's history (or at lease for a very long time), it's not something that one should rush into without careful consideration.

Your approach is idiotic at best, and completely manipulative at worst. Please refer back to my courtcase analogy. In your method the jury would be out before even hearing any evidence. What chance is there - in that scenario - of a fair conviction?

Absolutely zero. You fear what the nationalists have to say because you know it'll be a strong case. Deal with it.

You treat the Scottish people as idiots. Even if they had been lied to be pro-unionists, I have faith that Scottish people are a rational bunch who can see through lies and go with their heads. Furthermore, if there was a pro-unionist media bias, the SNP would still be a lunatic fringe party that would be laughed out of every serious debate. Please try and maintain at least some form of consistency in your arguments, even if it is just superficial.

The facts don't need two years to get out there. What a silly thing to say. The referendum could be done this year with all the desperate arguments the SNP have to cling on to, and the result would still probably be the same as it is now.

[kka25]

(Original post by Azog 150)
Because people in Scotland share all the same gripes with our political system that people do in the rest of the UK. We take turns to be ruled by two parties that have ****ed up ruling this country time and time again and yet continue to get into power, controlling parliamentary majorities on minority votes. What's more, Scotland racks up very little Conservative votes and yet every few parliamentary terms has to put up with a Conservative government almost entirely voted in by England (and before you say anything I am no fan of Labour either). When did we last have a truly popular Prime Minister or ruling party?

And unlike us here in England, Scotland has a chance to do something about it in the form of independence. Even if an independent Scotland does ultimately end up suffering the exact same problems as the UK does currently, at least they will have had a chance to do it better which is more then the rest of us can currently hope for. Historical differences, nationalism, anti-English sentiment and a belief that Scotland is somehow 'oppressed' may play a role amongst a small minority, and that is reasoning I simply can't abide by. But for most of Scotland, I think its just a case of being fed up and I don't blame them because many in England feel the exact same way.

I also think that this quite frankly arrogant belief that many in England have that Scotland will not dare vote independent will only spur on Scottish support for independence. Many in England already seem to have brushed off the referendum as a foregone conclusion.

My solution would be federalisation of the UK and the increase of political power at the local level. I think anything less and this 305 year old Union will come to an abrupt end. I'd happily follow Scotland out of it if it meant I would no longer have to be ruled by a bunch of far-removed Westminster career politicians.

(Original post by Cyanohydrin)
Regards royalty the Scottish Stewart family became the monarchy of England and Scotland in the early 1600s after Elizabeth the I of England died childless (which is why our current Queen is a direct descendent of Robert the Bruce - the monarch William Wallace (Braveheart) fought for. The political union happened a century later after the union of monarchy (called the "Union of the Crowns) in the early 1700s in the "Act of Union" when the Scottish and English parliaments both agreed to union - Scotland at the time was bankrupt after trying to set up unsuccessful colonies in South America and it's merchant class desperately wanted access to the trade routes that England had started to develop in the English Empire - which later became the British Empire - an empire Scots were very proud of before European colonial empires became unfashionable! England wanted to ensure Scotland didn't ally itself with France so agreed to union.

Scottish nationalism is more to do with anger at our political class than history. We Scots love England really and you will always be an old friend of Scotland regardless of union or not.

Thank you. Now I've some idea about it

Grateful